this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024

37 points (79.4% liked)

Linux

48410 readers

838 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r

KDE Vs Gnome - Heavyweight Championship (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by Tekkip20@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml

64 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Ding Ding Ding

It comes down to this, the heavyweight desktop championship between two powers in the Linux world.

In the blue corner, we have the mighty KDE, KDE comes with a wealth of customization options and good features with every update. It serves a nice alternative to windows 10 or 11s desktop and itself as an OS.

KDE has got so good that even legendary distro, Fedora, wishes to use it in its dealings.

In the grey/black corner, we have GNOME, This is a heavy distro with some ram usage, but it strives to be a simple desktop for usage and has had some good features every new version it comes packaged in as well.

GNOME has had a long history much like KDE, But controversial changes from its older brother.

However.. big name distros like Ubuntu have used it across millions of machines in different sectors.

What desktop do you favour and why? Explain your thoughts.

Round 2... GO!

Ding

(page 2) 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] lancalot@discuss.online 10 points 1 week ago

Initially, I was drawn to KDE Plasma for familiarity. Therefore, when installing Linux for the first time, I chose a distro with KDE Plasma. Which happened to be Fedora Kinoite 35, a very new distro at the time. It was clearly buggy and after fiddling with it for some time, I just had to rebase to Silverblue (and GNOME) for the lack of alternatives.

Thankfully, I actually happened to really like GNOME. This was on a laptop and GNOME's touchpad gestures just felt very satisfying and intuitive; much better than anything else I had experienced before. Its (intended) workflow also made a lot of sense that way.

GNOME has really grown on me ever since. And while I've revisited KDE Plasma to see what I was supposedly missing out on, I simply stuck to GNOME as it felt cleaner and more elegant.

[–] d4f0@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

I like both. I prefer KDE for keyboard and mouse use and GNOME for touchscreen use.

[–] Libb@jlai.lu 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

What desktop do you favour and why? Explain your thoughts.

Xfce & Cinnamon.

If I had to pick between KDE or Gnome, I would go KDE without any hesitation as I quite like it whereas I'm not really a fan of Gnome. Gnome UI is OK I guess, it's just the way they want to decide for everything I am not a fan of (After 35+ years using Apple, I did not switch to let anyone else decide for me ;). If I don't use KDE it's mostly because it requires too much work to "tone it down" and make it behave like I want my DE to. Out of the box, there is too much features I have to turn off and configure, features that are also spread between too many (and not all of them... obvious) menus/settings. What's great with KDE is that it's at all possible to configure all that, it's amazing. It's just too much for me. Be it XFCE (on Debian on my desktop) or Cinnamon (on Mint on the laptop) I barely need to change anything to have them do what I wish.

So, to summarize I would say it's my untamed laziness that dictates my choice of a DE :p

It's also the reason why I do not use one of those tiling WM I know exist and I know, as a user spending my time with my fingers on the keyboard, I would love to use in place of the standard floating windows. Alas, having them correctly configured and running, and then having to relearn decades old habits, would require a time and an energy I have no desire to spend. So, I don't. Still, I understand why some people like them so much ;)

edit: clarifications

[–] N0x0n@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

XFCE team here !!! Though I was kinda surprised they didn't enable XFwm (as stated by arch linux wiki) by default and had some strange issues with GTK apps (big black shadow arround apps). Took me some time to figure that out.

If I had to chose I would probably go for KDE. Gnome is great and it's nice to have alternatives that are so different and also up to date ! However, I hate GNOME's design choice. I hate my Mac and Gnome feels to similar to even bother with it.

[–] eugenia@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

I use Mint with Cinnamon with the Cinnamenu menu (instead of the default ugly one). I'm able to make Mint to start up at 700 MB of RAM. On my fast desktop I have Debian Testing with Gnome 47, that one starts at 1.5 GB of RAM. I'm thinking of using Mint there too.

[–] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

You didn't mention KDE's lack of any adequate stability. That's what makes it incomparable to GNOME. They serve completely different use cases.

[–] MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago (8 children)

KDE Plasma is wonderfully stable if you mean reliable, if you mean unchanging then yeah, it has quite a few changes.

[+] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml -6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I meant reliability. It's bad if you use ANY feature besides virtual desktops and app opening. In my understanding "stability" is stability of ALL features of the program, no matter how rarely they're used.

[–] MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

It really isn't, at least in my experience. And I have an Nvidia card!

All software beyond a moderate complexity has bugs.

[–] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

It really isn't, at least in my experience. And I have an Nvidia card!

Oh then it makes sense why you argued. However it's important to keep in mind that experience can vary among users. For example, in my case Plasma was very unstable on an Intel iGPU.

All software beyond a moderate complexity has bugs.

Not an excuse tbh.

[–] MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Not an excuse tbh.

The thing to do is participate in the beta programs and report any bugs you find, as you're having so much instability you would be an ideal participant whereas me with my smooth running wouldn't.